I was more thinking of getting better photos of the dogs for identification as a restricted breed - certainly not confronting them!

Ah! no, I can't get near their place. We live in the Dandenong mountains so very steep and lots of trees. I can't see into their block from any side, even from the road.

I just gave a signed statement to the council to say what happened. Each dog will get a $311 fine which is much more than I was expecting. The council ranger assures me that they are now contained, though something big was in my yard yesterday. My camera battery went flat so I didn't get any images this time but there was stuff thrown around again and my quail coop was damaged.. She said she would do extra patrols in my area to try to see them.

That's a good link, the more interesting part to me was the extra link at the very end (American stats of breeds involved in severe injury, death). Any dog is capable of momentarily "losing it" and if it's a Chi or a Cav it is just an annoyance, but if it is a Labrador or a Rottweiler (let alone a restricted breed) or more than one dog stirring one another along (irrespective of breed) than it can be fatal. It doesn't mean the bigger breeds are more nasty, the very opposite is usual, it just recognises that the bigger the dog the greater the damage. That link is worth reading through to the end.

No that's not fair, I know most Councils can be pretty useless at clear answers and prompt action. Unless it's a soft target, then they are instant. This one excels though. There's an Arabic saying "In buying a horse and taking a wife, close your eyes tightly and commend yourself to God". I think dealing with YR also applies.

That Doncaster story is quite sobering. Do you have any details on that story?

Nothing I can much go into, as I had a records-management contract at the firm representing the worker, so knew the case well at the time. Obviously thug-type owners, the dog was picked up at large by a Ranger and impounded. Worker was checking water in the kennels after hours so no-one around. Dog owners broke in with bolt cutters and bashed the worker. Think the fact they used a gun had some legal implication with their case. Worker's case was separate, injury more than severe, and workers comp was not offered due to out of hours work, something like that. Think fair compo was agreed in the end, just adds to my ongoing cynicism of councils.

No that's not fair, I know most Councils can be pretty useless at clear answers and prompt action. Unless it's a soft target, then they are instant. This one excels though

I forgot to mention, when I was giving my statement today I was showing the Ranger the photos I had again. The first ones she could infringe for but the second day I had pictures of one of the dogs in my yard she couldn't infringe for because the dogs head wasn't in the photo so she couldn't identify it for sure. My camera also took a 15 second video of the dog on that second day, which in the background you can hear someone yelling the dogs names "Bella and ??". The ranger could understand what both the names in the video were, but I could only make out the first name (which annoyingly was the other dog, not the one in my picture). The ranger said if I could get the second name we might be able to use the video as evidence to fine them for the second day. So i'm there guessing random dog names that kind of sound like the muffled words i'm hearing. The ranger obviously knew that the dog "Bella" was the others mate, and she knew what what being said for the other name but for some reason her being able to ID it but not me meant it didn't count.. It was like some cruel Rumpelstiltskin thing! I feel like you could go to jail for murder on less evidence than this.

If they know where the dogs live, then they know the dogs names because of their registration details. It wouldn't be that hard to listen to the names being called and see if they sound similar in flow/syllable count/etc to the dogs names.

Their requirements for evidence are ridiculously high, particularly given for the most part charges/fines with local rangers can be made at the discretion of said ranger. She wants more evidence not because she isn't convinced it's them, but so her job is covered should the owners turn around and threaten legal action against them. As has been said, councils are more than quick and thorough (and with less evidence) with soft and easy targets.

The fact remains that the only person that needs to be convinced at a local law level is really just the ranger. More solid proof is only required should it escalate to VCAT or similar. And even then, VCAT often handles cases with more common sense than local councils. She's not proceeding with this because she ultimately doesn't want to, not because she cant.

Could you upload the video to Youtube and get a few third-party opinions on the audio in the video? It's surprising how different audio sounds when listened through some good quality headphones.

The latter could be a variation like Bub or Bug I suppose, but it doesn't sound like those quite as much. And if they are using a 'human' name like Bella, then Bud would seem more likely anyway as people often stick to naming themes or styles with pets.

PS, Great quality video, I can't understand why the ranger would be resisting using it properly, it's easy to see who the dogs are without any confusion.

Definitely agree sounds like "Bella, Bud." Its a shame that the owners aren't being dealt with efficiently by the local councils. Its owners like these that cause breeds of dog like this to get a bad reputation by not training them properly and allowing them to wander.

_________________Australian Langshan Bantams, Old English Game Bantams, Leghorn Bantams and Barbu d'Uccles Bantams.

if you happened to come home and find these dogs accidently stuck inside a large secure cage you happened to have lying around your yard, you would have to call the ranger to release them. You would be very frightened, them being such big viscous dogs of a scary breed, and would need urgent help from the ranger to assist you.(I could imagine that you could sound VERY frightened on the phone!!) Dogs that roam around like these occasionally do become stuck in cages and spare chook runs particularly if the home owner is a bit careless and leaves meat or bones in the household compost scraps thrown out for the chickens....

I've been trying to work out how to turn the empty cage into a trap for anything that comes back. It would be big enough. Apparently after the owners get the first warning then catching dogs/cats on your property and handing them over to the Ranger is ok. Problem is I'm at work all day so i'd need to figure out some ingenious way to get the cage door to shut behind them. I'm working on it!

You know, I was watching the video again just then, and the dog is easily identifiable.

The body type, shape and musculature alone is enough, but you CAN see the face. Not front on, but there is footage of the head of the dog. I can see it is jowly (with dark lips/jowls), has folded forward ears, a boxy head, a bit of a double chin/floppy neck (a fairly unique feature), and from what I can see no melanistic mask on the face. ALL of these are identifiers and differentiate one dog from another.

If I can see all of that never having seen the dogs before then I don't know how your ranger can't. The footage and description can be compared to the footage you have of the head and it is easy to see whether they are the same dog or not. That, and the fact you have names.

Grr, it is so infuriating your ranger is being so useless. The trap idea is brilliant, I hope you can set something up.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum